Volgograd court banned to advertise dietary supplements with false properties

The Volgograd Public Organization, which protects consumer rights, initiated legal proceedings against the Center for Health and Longevity. The reason was the placement on the online trading platform of a biologically active additive, in the description of which the seller indicated information about its therapeutic effect.

The product was attributed to the properties of oncoprotector, adaptogen, as well as effectiveness in the treatment of asthma, tuberculosis and immunodeficiency conditions. However, as established during the inspection, this product did not pass state registration as a medicine, and such statements can mislead buyers and harm their health.

The case was considered by the Kirov district court of Volgograd. Having studied the conclusions of specialized specialists and directly examined the product card, the court concluded that there were violations. The demands of the public were partially satisfied: the defendant was obliged to stop disseminating false information, inform consumers about the decision made within ten days, and also pay a penalty for each day of non-execution of the judicial act.

At the same time, the plaintiff’s claims regarding the absence of the seller’s contact details in the description were rejected by the court, since this information was already posted on the page. The Court of Appeal left this decision unchanged.

Representatives of the company tried to challenge the conclusions of the lower courts in cassation. According to the Fourth Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction, the complaint was rejected, and the arguments of the defendant were declared untenable. The highest instance confirmed the position of colleagues: it is unacceptable to declare the medicinal properties of a product if it has not passed mandatory registration and is not included in the state register of medicines.

The judges also pointed to the inadmissibility of misleading consumers about the quality of products and stressed the obligation of sellers to provide complete and reliable information. As a result, the judicial acts of previous instances remained in force.